| Author
|
the cosmic octave and mathematics
|
Kane
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
23
Posts :
1772
Posted : Jun 30, 2009 15:57
|
Quote:
|
On 2009-06-30 15:24, Moki.Time.Wave.Zero wrote:
i have this lady schubert on my website. a video interview with her. i met her once by chance. she is doing it in german hospitals ( please note that she is also doing classical music aside and not involved in trance). she is healing anything with the tuning forks. especially i have to mention things like bone pain or pains in the back. this could be proved in terms of statistics.
|
|
You really think that you would get drastically and consistently different results asking for several experiences if the forks were tuned to completely irrelevant frequencies and were similarly administered?
  You believe in the users?
Yeah, sure. If I don't have a user, then who wrote me? |
|
|
|
moki
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
38
Posts :
1931
Posted : Jun 30, 2009 16:49
|
well, no, i think i can present a very scientific statistic result because i have worked a lot with presenting statistic methods in the media in the past. i simply really know how it is done, but here in isratrance i came for the first time to the idea that i could play a bit with spss for fun and prove this.
i would take enough people for the experiment to have the opportunity to get significantly important numbers.
but this is will be a more "social science", because i am gonna ask the persons and not study the biology and neurology behind it. i am not an expert on the last.
and btw this was the last point, the points one to three are more important for natural science.
|
|
|
|
Kane
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
23
Posts :
1772
Posted : Jun 30, 2009 17:03
|
If you can't test it against a placebo and get consistent results, then you aren't proving anything. A testimonial is not evidence.
You believe in the users?
Yeah, sure. If I don't have a user, then who wrote me? |
|
|
|
Inner Demon
Started Topics :
6
Posts :
321
Posted : Jun 30, 2009 17:14
|
Quote:
|
On 2009-06-30 11:30, Moki.Time.Wave.Zero wrote:
Quote:
| I suggest that you clarify to us all what the point of this is in relation to music production, and if you can't I reckon the mods should move this to another section on the forum. |
|
well, if you havent understood after 9 pages here what is the connection to music, then i guess it is a good idea to move the thread or whatever. besides i am still really wondering why it si hard to just leave a discussion that does not tell anything to you. i am not here to sort of convince anyone, i am here to see what others think. i can have this discussion with two people only. i mean, i dont participate in the most threads here either, because i dont understand what is relevant for me inside of them...i dont start to shout at people because they are talking about things that dont interest me or i dont understand. but it is okey, if you see this thread as a disaster, close it or move or whatever.
no there is more than one reality. the consensual one is the reality of the majority. it is based on the observation of the majority, which does not have to be the right one for anyone else. exactly the same way sientists have a war about the quantums as well. most say one thing, the rest says another thing.
btw such posts like yours tire me so much. if you really dont see anything to do with music, then pity for you. yes write to the mods to end up this thread and me on this board, i know there dozens of little helpers like you here.
|
|
First off I never SHOUTED at you and I'm not a "little helper". Stop your demeaning personal attacks.
Secondly, I'll participate in any discussion I like. I am highly critical of the information you're presenting, not uninterested.
I was merely asking for a clarification, if its so easy to provide why don't you just give me one? The last 9 pages are pretty messy.
Of course I understand what the superficial connection to music is but the links you're providing are at best astrological mumbo jumbo + created by individuals with a vested financial interest. With money in the picture, ALL (and I mean ALL) reliability by default goes out the window since profit is the overshadowing motive.
As far as realities go, of course everyone experiences their own, but that reality can not be defined - which is what I said. The only one we can define is the one where we find common ground.
Consensual reality is NOT based on the "observations of the majority". The majority does not engage in scientific observation. It is based on predictability of events/observations and repeatability of experiments regardless of who performs them. This is the very foundation of science.
There is no war about Newtonian physics because experiments yield the same results for everyone. Quantum physics however is theoretical at this point which of course means different opinions. Again mixing theory and proof....
If you're really just concerned about learning more and finding the truth why do you attack people that debunk your ideas? I always assume I could be wrong. Being proven wrong is great becuase it elevates one to a higher level of understanding. I'm certainly open to the possibility that you are right about all this (wouldn't that be cool) but first I need to see convincing arguments delivered in a coherent and logical fashion. I see only speculation that cannot be proven nor disproven and I'm afraid that doesn't add up to anything. Kinda like religion.
|
|
|
|
moki
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
38
Posts :
1931
Posted : Jun 30, 2009 17:16
|
kane, okey, forget this one first ( see below). lets turn to the first three points of possible study.
btw i even found out what is exactly the contra argument in my whole idea and i will help you out with it cause i see that everyone is too weak to think of a real argument to fight the theory.
is sound a dynamic system in terms of chaos theory??? this is the contra argument that could make my whole idea look insignificant.
BUT
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear_dynamical_system
here it is. isnt this exactly the octave??????????????????????????????????? anyone an opinion? and in particular the interval thing. i have to learn more about the strange attractors.
( btw sure i can prove it by means of sociology and psychology and with it i would have covered the field of statistics in social studies).
in the science world, where i actually come from, and i have been paid a lot earlier to do statistic for the media industry with big big questanaries and a lot of people being asked). this is what has a significance in the scientific world of social studies.
placebo effect. i tell you that i was even educated to prove anything. even if i dont prove it with the first statistic method, i will prove it with the second try. i can ( exactly as the theory of the big bang) turn every paradox in the numbers to be a statistic measurement error ( how is this called in english, dont know the right term right now).
dont worry, i will really make a complicated questionary to fnd out the significance of the placebo. the persons will not know the purpose of the study. i just take some people in the hospitals with problems in the back, divide them into three grups ( to check the value of placebo) and then test them and their reaction on the tuning forks.
|
|
|
|
Inner Demon
Started Topics :
6
Posts :
321
Posted : Jun 30, 2009 17:29
|
Actually I made a mess of the reality part of my last post 
'Consensual reality' as a loose term is indeed the observation of the majority - I was referring to scientific reality. However consensual reality cannot really be defined either as it is subject to limitations of language/communication etc.
Anyway, point being that if you want to establish any kind of knowledge we have to stomp the same ground - scientific reality. Saying that you work best in your own reality doesn't do anything for me and frankly is an easy way out of not being able to explain yourself. |
|
|
|
Colin OOOD
Moderator
Started Topics :
95
Posts :
5380
Posted : Jun 30, 2009 17:38
|
|
moki
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
38
Posts :
1931
Posted : Jun 30, 2009 18:21
|
really???????? you cant see anything related to an octave in this page???? Xn+1=A.Xn
?????????????????
A is the number two????????????????????
|
|
|
|
moki
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
38
Posts :
1931
Posted : Jun 30, 2009 18:24
|
i need to really keep a conversation with cousto....yesterday i askeed him for the first time about the attractors.
before someone else here finds the strange attractor time wave zero and takes the next nobel award:))))))))))). of course i am joking, but the octave is very visible on the last page.....
|
|
|
|
Colin OOOD
Moderator
Started Topics :
95
Posts :
5380
Posted : Jun 30, 2009 18:39
|
|
moki
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
38
Posts :
1931
Posted : Jun 30, 2009 18:47
|
|
oh this is a very interesting fact btw. thanks for mentioning it.
|
|
|
|
Colin OOOD
Moderator
Started Topics :
95
Posts :
5380
Posted : Jun 30, 2009 18:52
|
|
moki
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
38
Posts :
1931
Posted : Jun 30, 2009 19:11
|
yes i did. i tell you that it is a very interesting fact in case you did not see it.
the matrix is the intervalls within the octave. you take another octave and you have the same matrix. with the number two at the basis.
|
|
|
|
moki
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
38
Posts :
1931
Posted : Jun 30, 2009 19:14
|
so now i am even more sure that i was right to assume this with the strange attractor and the attractor. because the matrix is existent. it is an attractor. really. to find out the strange attractor, i guess i will need any knowledge about arpegiators and how they are programmed.
what really impresses me is that i actually really did not know that the software of terrence mckenna timewave zero was based on strange attractors. it is an incredible thing, because i actually took the name time wave zero not because of the strange attractors.
|
|
|
|
moki
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
38
Posts :
1931
Posted : Jun 30, 2009 19:27
|
there is a project called time wave zero in trance released recently. do they read here? do they know more about the strange attractors?
does actually anyone know more about how arpegiators or in particularly how is fractal music done???????????
anyone here who might be so polite and friendly to clear me out on this?
i feel we are so near to finding out what is the right strange attractor! the solution is a strange attractor itself.
|
|
|
|
